GOP Rep Explains How DACA Recipients Would 'Earn' Citizenship With His Bill

[RoosGirl]

It was introduced in the Senate by Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Chris Coons, (D-DE).

We are so screwed.

[Fishrrman]

"Rep. Jeff Denham (R-CA) wants to see his USA Act reach the House floor for a vote. Short for the Uniting and Securing America Act, the bill would give DACA recipients a path to citizenship."

No.
Just.... NO !

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 US 678 (2001):  “the Due Process Clause applies to all ‘persons’ within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent.”

So no, due process is not limited to citizens.

So why is it false to say the due process does not apply to non-US Citizens who are NOT within the United States?

Do you admit the lie you are trying to foist upon us all?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

The only false statement is yours, regarding due process.  If it’s not false, then you should be able to prove that by a citation to the Constitution or to relevant caselaw.

Prove it, or stfu.

A lie.  You need to shut up as you do not have anything to bring forward toward due process for people NOT within the US.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 US 678 (2001):  “the Due Process Clause applies to all ‘persons’ within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent.”

So no, due process is not limited to citizens.

Read this opinion, Counselor.

It is explicit in saying the detention of an alien is not unnecessarily delayed.  It does not give some illegal equal protections under our laws as you claim it does.

[Oceander]

Read this opinion, Counselor.

It is explicit in saying the detention of an alien is not unnecessarily delayed.  It does not give some illegal equal protections under our laws as you claim it does.

I am not claiming that it gives an alien “equal protection” - I am claiming merely that it shows that due process is not limited to citizens.

And that is all I need it for to prove the falsity of your statement that due process is limited to citizens. 

You would do yourself a world of good if you would start using half the brains and common sense God gave you. 

[Oceander]

A lie.  You need to shut up as you do not have anything to bring forward toward due process for people NOT within the US.

You didn’t say that due process was limited to only within the borders of the US.  You made the blanket assertion that due process is limited to citizens.  It is not.  Your statement was clearly false and I have proven that. 

Grow up and accept the consequences of your own mistake. 

[Oceander]

So why is it false to say the due process does not apply to non-US Citizens who are NOT within the United States?

Do you admit the lie you are trying to foist upon us all?

That’s not the statement you made.

You said due process was limited to citizens, period.  That is a false statement. 

[IsailedawayfromFR]

You didn’t say that due process was limited to only within the borders of the US.  You made the blanket assertion that due process is limited to citizens.  It is not.  Your statement was clearly false and I have proven that. 

Grow up and accept the consequences of your own mistake.

You now qualify a statement you made that said "So no, due process is not limited to citizens. "

Or how about "No.  You tell us where in the Constitution it states that due process is limited to citizens. "

Or "That due process is reserved for citizens.  It is not. "

You have been lying for so long, it is tough to keep up with the lies, eh?

[Oceander]

You now qualify a statement you made that said "So no, due process is not limited to citizens. "

Or how about "No.  You tell us where in the Constitution it states that due process is limited to citizens. "

Or "That due process is reserved for citizens.  It is not. "

You have been lying for so long, it is tough to keep up with the lies, eh?

You simply cannot admit you were wrong.  You said, and I quote, that due process was limited to citizens.  You did not qualify the statement by geography, or anything else.  Your statement is clearly false.  Accept that fact and move on. 

[IsailedawayfromFR]

You simply cannot admit you were wrong.  You said, and I quote, that due process was limited to citizens.  You did not qualify the statement by geography, or anything else.  Your statement is clearly false.  Accept that fact and move on.

Move as far away.

We do not have due process for all people on this planet.

And the Constitution never said we did.

Your propensity for tearing into people to force your viewpoint simply does not work here.

[Oceander]

Why does someone deserve what you call 'due process' if one broke the law to come into this country?

Due process is a right reserved for citizens.

There, in all it’s glory, is your statement.  It is not qualified by geography or anything else.  You state, without qualification, that due process is for citizens only.  Your statement is categorical and necessarily applies both within as well as without the US.

As such, it is false.  Whatever the reach of due process outside the US, inside the US everyone is entitled to due process, whether citizen or not. 

[Oceander]

There, in all it’s glory, is your statement.  It is not qualified by geography or anything else.  You state, without qualification, that due process is for citizens only.  Your statement is categorical and necessarily applies both within as well as without the US.

As such, it is false.  Whatever the reach of due process outside the US, inside the US everyone is entitled to due process, whether citizen or not. 

@IsailedawayfromFR

Crickets

Thanks for conceding. 

[RoosGirl]

OMG   

[Sanguine]

OMG   

I was thinking the same thing.  Like a toothache.  Or a broken arm. 

[IsailedawayfromFR]

There, in all it’s glory, is your statement.  It is not qualified by geography or anything else.  You state, without qualification, that due process is for citizens only.  Your statement is categorical and necessarily applies both within as well as without the US.

As such, it is false.  Whatever the reach of due process outside the US, inside the US everyone is entitled to due process, whether citizen or not.

And it most certainly is.  Due process cannot be applied to people not citizens wherever they exist.

You do not have any merit to your arguments as you try to attach qualifications to what I said.

Even the reference you had does not give due process to all people, only to a certain alien who was held for a prolonged time.

[RoosGirl]

I was thinking the same thing.  Like a toothache.  Or a broken arm.

I think either of those would be preferable to this thread right now.

[thackney]

Oh, there is that 'within its jurisdiction' once again.  What do you believe that means anyway?  Think it pertains to an uninvited person who is not within the jurisdiction of the US as he came into this country without its permission?  And are you now advocating for those imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay?

Guantanamo Bay is not US soil.  It is leased, not owned, by the US from Cuba.

[thackney]

...those imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay?

You picked a great example for this topic.  It is the reason the prison exists at Guantanamo Bay.  If those prisoners were brought to Fort Leavenworth, the government would be required to follow due process.

https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-constitutional-debates-over-the-military-prison-at-guantanamo-bay

[Oceander]

And it most certainly is.  Due process cannot be applied to people not citizens wherever they exist.

You do not have any merit to your arguments as you try to attach qualifications to what I said.

Even the reference you had does not give due process to all people, only to a certain alien who was held for a prolonged time.

/snicker

You’re just too afraid to read your own words and acknowledge your mistake.  What a spoilt child.